You know you're over the target if you're taking flak.

It also brings into question, who the delicate flowers hereabouts really are.

So far you have not, even when asked in the open or by PM

Unfortunately, I can't do anything about it.

But, as I said, it does prove my point. Certain folks are more interested in making and maintaining enemy relationships than they are making actual progress on the issue of gun relate crime and assault.

Much more important to do "Something" that feels good and pisses the other side off.

(And we're supposed to be the ones that supposedly want more dead children?)

But, let's all keep in mind, it is the zenith of the gun grabbers achievements both on DU and in the real world, getting a post hidden!

It's about all they seem to be able to accomplish.

It is about control, and being "right". "Right" in their minds anyway.

Don't forget Gun Control is a religious cult, complete with it's own dogma... You can never offend it, question it, or even doubt it... Any of those happen, it MUST be shouted down...

....exactly like a cult...

...some folks are "Right" about guns in the wrong way. Control and legalism bordering on cult behavior is a Rightist type of attitude.

questionable hides. I do not think that one was hide worthy. I always find it troubling that I guess you have to pass some peoples purity test on RKBA to be a "real" progressive.

Here is one of the alerts that was on one of my posts.

"No party has a monopoly on wisdom. No democracy works without compromise." Barack Obama
"...what I've learned most is that no one has a monopoly on truth or wisdom. I've learned that we make progress by listening to each other, across every apparent political or ideological divide." Elena Kagan

Tell me again, who is it that should be listening to those folks?

It can be annoying, like a swarm of gnats in your face on a nice evening, but if they ever start gaining ground in the real world, then it becomes a problem for all of us.

But it seems they have decided to leave it all up to Bloomberg and his $$$, thinking that will win the day for them (while they sit on the couch and play Call of Duty when no one's looking).

IMNSHO, by the time they realize it's not working, our rights will be much better off for the next few generations and they won't be able to turn that ship around.

I like O'Malley, who is running for prez, but his record on gun-control will bring scrutiny and hard resistance.

why the hell was that thread hidden?

If you feel so inclined, could you post the jury results?

Please, if you're ok with it.

All I want to know is, where is the spelling nazi link that I asked for?

as shown by the comments by juror number 1. That response alone should be alerted on to let Skinner know. I have in the past but never have had any response to my request. I find that a little disappointing myself as a progressive democrat.

Why a snake lover would spend so much time on a cat fancy website extolling the virtues of snakes, I don't know.

...some folks are just snake haters first and foremost and find some kindred spirits among cat lovers.


OT and unrelated: I love cats.

most of us are not extolling the virtues of guns but are providing factual information and just trying to have a polite and cordial discussion. I see you still have not answered my repeated question if you were the one that posted an insult directed at me on an alert. You did quickly post in the thread to discntnt_irny_srcsm, curious to know why you do not respond to me?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172163733#post3

Here is the alert I have asked you a few times about and even sent a PM to so it would not be in the open.

Fully 1/3 of Dems own guns.

This site is called Democratic Underground.

Not "Antigun Underground", or "Ihateguns Underground", though both those names might be used to accurately describe the other protected forum.

The other forum, however, is no more representative of DU as a whole, than this one is, and you're well aware of it, just like everyone else is.

Not that I mind pointing out examples of the ridiculous...

The answer is there.

Attributing to me a stance I never claimed to take, are we?

How quaint. And common.


I'd be happy with objective standards of behavior for both sides.

How about you?

I think I know what your answer to that question is going to be:

that your protected "safe haven" is. If you are such the majority on Democratic Underground, why do you require a place that is protected from open discussion. This group is just so much more democratic than the group you run. It is so slow in traffic you post more over here as there is nothing to really moderate over there. We know that by the insults of DU firearms owners you allow and condone. That is with one exception that you did do your job and one of your few posters got mad and took a leave.

I see you still have not answered my question one way or the other, very telling if I do say so myself.

very polite and it would be polite to respond in some fashion. I think most if not all PM's here are not originally solicited.

If it was me, I would at least own up to it. I have nothing to be afraid of or hide.

...I most certainly wouldn't expect an actual reply.

I always try and be nice and polite. If someone sends me a message, I at least give them the courtesy of a response. I may choose not to answer but I will respond and give my reason. Of course in that situation if it were me, I would have responded and said yes. But that would not happen because I do not insult people. I guess times have changed and people are just less polite and respectful, I was taught that as a child and it stuck all of these many years.

Have a great night, bed time.

Like I said, I guess we just differ on what is polite and just a plain courtesy. I have been sent many PM's from other members and they are not solicited and not spam either. I always respond. I have also sent messages to other DU members and they were not solicited and not spam. I have only had two that were never responded to out of several dozen I have sent.

Juror 5 has it right.

Thank you

Idiot.

You could try re posting it and try again with a different jury.

...I could alert it myself so the jury gets the message.

Thanks but I think I made my point.

This group is not a safe group as it is not specified in the SOP.

...both of the other two hosts are still around.

I'm taking all of this with a grain or 3 of salt. I'd still like to work together with folks on the control side to make actual progress. There are a number here of the pro-control persuasion that are respectful enough and seem in interested in cooperation and honest dialog. For that I applaud them.

I took #7's comment as meaning the discussion of guns is permitted as opposed to GD where such discussion is not.
Perhaps he/she does think pro-RKBA is protected here. I don't know or care.

Last edited Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:43 AM - Edit history (1)

...the alerter and four jurors, thought I was "disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate" and I didn't use that word. I was told I was divisive for suggesting that working together rather than slinging insults was a good idea. Someone else own up to abusing the jury system and voting to hide anything pro-RKBA. Lastly one juror decided that being critical of applauding the idea of "whatever pisses off the NRA is good" is an attack.


This is a case of a group with little patch of skin and muscle waiting for a psychosomatic bruise.
I'm just glad I could be of service to them.

Point of order :

"Monday morning quarterback analysis", to quote your post, is usually not done by the same quarterback who fumbled the game away the day before.

The analysis was of the "game" that consisted of the alert.
I didn't play in that game.

...Juror #7 said, "...Not a safe group to attack progressives!"

There was no attack. Juror #6 had a complete grasp of what I said.

I don't suppose I'll ever be able to understand that POV.

IMHO views contrary to the accepted orthodox view (the individual RKBA being a fundamental human right) exist as a sort of heresy to human rights. Analogous to religious heresies, this pro-control heresy denies a fundamental aspect of humanity, the right to self-defense, the right defend one's family, property and the fruits of one's efforts, the right to enjoy one's life.

Don't judge the control side too harshly. The Founders failed in some areas as well. Although they believed in self-defense and rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people, only white males were really considered "people".

Show me where it mentions RKBA: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

It doesn't.

The right to life encompasses the right to self-defense.

that is a reasonable amount. Just do not confiscate the existing several hundred million out there that are over that.

...I'm not sure it would make a difference either.

It's just pointless street theater that does nothing to address criminal use or negligent misuse of firearms. It's the functional equivalent of trying to address the issue of DUI by restricting engine horsepower and mag wheels. Both ignore the bad actors that would not be affected by such laws.